Introduction
Nature plays a huge role in the lives of everyone in one way or another. In the interviews that I conducted everyone said that they like and appreciate nature, not a very big surprise. But their opinions of nature were still varied. Teenagers expressed the most diverse or varied answers when asked "Do you go out of your way to recycle?" some said that if recycling inconvenienced them in any way they would just throw their trash away or even on the ground for a very small portion of the interviews. But some said that they go out of their way to do whats best for the environment, the older people that I interviewed expressed care for their environment and seemed the most protective of their world. But throughout these interviews I realized that a lot of peoples opinions had resembled some people that are discussed in this wikispace. People that take religious views on nature, people that have a purely conservational opinion on nature, people that will bring up different types of nature like urban wilderness. The interviews challenged people to think about the topics brought up with questions like "What is nature?". And all of them had at least mentioned every single aspect brought up in this wikispace.
What does Nature mean to me?
Nature to me, is something that is very beautiful and feels like it has not been touched by man, even though all nature has been touched by man. To me central park is not nature at all because its been altered to ridiculous extremes. You don't have that same feeling when you step into central park as you do when you step into the tranquil and life-filled forests of New Hampshire. The reason for that is that you aren't supposed to know exactly what is in those forests. In nature there is always some element of mystery, this theme is reflected in any story you read that has themes of nature. I remember walking around the back woods of New Hampshire and simply seeing a porcupine. Porcupines around that area are a very uncommon thing to see and it's things like that that just make me feel like I'm in somewhere unfamiliar and familiar at the same time. I don't know why but actually getting up close and personal with nature is very fascinating and it's amazing what you can find just by walking around for a few minutes. I'm not very accustomed to living in these big cities which are manufactured by man. But, even though I live in a fairly natural area, going into the woods and seeing things from a different perspective will always be special. I know some people that say that not knowing what's in the woods scares them, but to me nature is a very welcoming and calming force that reflects at least some of its power where ever you go.
How is nature regarded in today's society?
Nature is something that should live in harmony with all existing life on our planet. But, in the eyes of our society nature is just land that hasn't been warped and twisted into our own image. Nature is completely separated from our society when it comes to more populated areas of the world like New York city or Philadelphia etc.
People think that nature is a very beautiful thing because of how fascinating it is to see something so rare and so comparable to our own society. In a way our own society is reflected in natural life, but the natural life is far more primitive than our high class society. A lot of people in the world today will say that nature is something we should just leave alone because of it's beauty and that nature is what makes us human. A long time ago when nature wasn't something that had been mapped out and completely "understood" nature was viewed very religiously which is something that we'll be getting into soon. Nature was a very powerful and moving force and the way people that want to preserve nature might have shaped their opinions from books like Genesis or other stories of the world's creation. Yet, nature is also seen by many as an area that the world can obtain natural resources from like wood, coal, petroleum, gold, copper, iron, even some animal resources. So regardless of what nature means to others, people in charge will regard nature as something we get natural resources from.
Using the two initial texts, explain how our society views and should view/use/treat nature and wilderness. Citing examples from the two texts create a piece that states where we are today with our understanding of nature and it’s use and influence on our lives. Take from the many things we discussed to illuminate your point.
Society views our environment as an area with plenty of natural resources that will further benefit our society. The way our environment is treated is a more complex reality though, usually our environment is treated worse then how we actually look at it instead of just cutting down some trees and letting some grow or flourish we will sometimes completely disregard our views and do what seems to benefit our society more. But I still believe our society is a lot more like the author of the Idea Of A Garden in that, we view wilderness/nature as an important force in our lives and we respect but on the other hand we constantly destroy it so I guess we are more like a hybrid of how Brower looks at the environment and the author from the Idea Of A Garden.
From the three creation stories' point of view, what is the position of nature in our life?
The three creation stories of Genesis, Iroquois,
and Pima all have a unique way that they view life and nature.
The book of Genesis believes that god created the earth in seven days
and made man to try and live in harmony with that nature. Then man was tricked into eating the eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. This idea of man being told to live in harmony with nature and use it when you need too
then getting greedy and taking more then we needed defiantly pertains to our modern society. Our society does take a lot more than they save yet there is still wilderness in the world and we are using nature for us but also living in harmony with it as well. The creation story of Pima also has a view on nature
in that their god made lots of mistakes and destroyed and recreated the earth
several times because man and nature didn't combine very well because
of our own greed. But the story of Genesis is a lot more detailed in the way
humans and nature interact and its done in a way that's subtle but covers all the bases. According to Genesis our society will look at nature as one of the most beautiful things in the world but we won't treat it that way because we can't just have some of something because our greed won't allow us and we are not really worthy of the presence of nature and must be punished for doing
so.
Cotton Mather
Cotton Mather, one of the most celebrated of all of the New England Puritans in history, was born in February 12th 1663 at the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Cotton Mather also attended Harvard College when he was only twelve years old. His opinions on nature are derived from his religious beliefs. So because Cotton Mather is a Puritan he believes that nature is on this earth for man to utilize it exactly like views of Genesis. But his tone and point is a lot darker than Genesis and talks more about not knowing what is in the wilderness. At the top of his story "The Wonders Of The Invisible World" it says "A people of God in the Devil's Territories". This really speaks out to untamed wild America and he says that because of the mysterious aspect to this nature it is considered the land of the Devil. His stories don't necessarily say exactly why he thinks that the wilderness is the devil's territory but I believe that it is because of a story in the bible involving the Devil tempting baby Jesus with all of the land in the world and having him refuse it. He thinks that Puritans moving into the land of America and claiming that land in the name of god is making them receive punishment from the devil himself. So to sum it all up, Cotton Mather is a very educated man that uses his religion to explain nature or wilderness by saying that, God gave us nature and therefore we must all utilize it but still to be wary of the evil that lurks within the wild.
Emerson Ralph Waldo Emerson is somebody that is great to really summarize all this wikipage has worked up to be. Emerson's opinion on nature is religious as well taking from Genesis and in a way believing the opposite of what Cotton Mather. His beliefs are also scientific as well as religious showing that this man has an open mind. He believes we should use nature for the benefit of society but not to the extent that the author of "The Idea of a Garden" thinks that we should use nature. Unlike Cotton Mather who believes that wilderness is the devil's land and that controlled nature is the land of god, Emerson believes that nature was put here by god and we should definitely use it as a resource if it was given to us by god. He thinks we need to live in harmony with nature by using it for our own personal use. Though he does believe in god that doesn't mean he just accredits all nature to god, he believes that we must also study nature and takes a more scientific approach to viewing nature making Emerson very interesting in that matter. I think that Emerson is someone that has something that everyone could relate to in his opinions on nature, the main point being that we must enjoy nature and not cast it aside as something we rule over, but something that was put in our society that we must utilize and enjoy.
Jefferson's Notes On Virginia
I had read the Mountains passage and the rivers passage of Jefferson's Notes On Virginia. In the mountains passage Thomas Jefferson just seems to be very admirable of his landscape and how the mountains go along the sea coast for about 150 miles. Thomas Jefferson also seems to really res pect mountains or nature in general by saying the are "The spine of the country between the atlantic on one side, and The Mississippi and St. Lawrence on the other". This quote could take on a literal and metaphorical meaning saying that mountains our the bones of our country or parts of our country that must be respected or he could in the more literal sense just mean that the country is separated by mountains but I doubt that is the case.
In the passage "rivers" Thomas Jefferson all he does is just list every river that is in the state of virginia and where they lead and how deep they are. These notes on where things are probably started to get the attentions of people that are like Cotton Mather. The mapping of the unknown has probably made others aware of what's in nature. In this time of understanding nature, people started to go out and be inspired by these people.
Benjamin Franklin
Benjamin Franklin is an icon that everyone is familiar with in one way or another. I doubt that if you ask someone why Benjamin Franklin is famous they will say "Oh, I know him for his opinions of nature and Native American Culture". He was someone that wanted to see things for himself and this got him to go out into the wild and understand just like jefferson's notes on Virginia. Yet he is a man that looks past the title of "savage" on a Native American and just simply says they are a group of people that's ideology and ways of living are different then ours. He says that the Native Americans are much more able to work together in groups and kind of come together as a society much better then us. Why is that? I think he's saying that we can't live together as well as native americans can because of our very loose connection and understanding of our own environment. This goes with that idea on our nature walks that being in nature has a more calming air to it and you feel much more connected with the life around you. It's pretty difficult to appreciate nature inside of something like a brick building with plenty of modern technology inside. Benjamin Franklin's appreciation of the Native Americans doesn't just do what it says, it shows a difference between our two different lifestyles and analyzes why one works more in some ways and the other doesn't, and nature is a very big part of what works.
Crevecoeur: Letters From an American Farmer Michel-Guillame-Jean de Crevecoeur was a frenchman that immigrated over from France into America to become a farmer. Crevecoeur believed that there was a powerful relationship between men (or white men) and nature. Crevecoeur had roamed America and it's wilderness's for almost 10 years even living with Indians because he saw nature as a frontier with no bounds to the exploration of our country. He characterized nature as "A howling wilderness, a savage and barbaric place with equal ease". But being a farmer his opinions on nature were more like a past version of the author of "The Idea of a Garden" in that he believed man needs nature to survive, but we must not completely destroy it and we have to keep it alive. He is very fascinated in how we go from a small colony on an unknown continent that we have never been too, to being a country that has discovered so much by utilizing nature or more specifically rivers, trees, animals and all sorts of other things to build our great nation of America.
Rip Van Winkle
The story of Rip Van Winkle doesn't have as much to do with taking a stance on nature as much as the other stories. Nature in the story of Rip Van Winkle is more symbolic to the very definition of nature or wilderness in that it's a very mysterious and untamed place that can change you. So this story brings in the mysterious aspect of wilderness that Cotton Mather discusses. A good representation of mystery in the story would be the gnome with his jug of booze that put him to sleep for twenty years. I don't think that the fact that it's a gnome that puts him to sleep for twenty years really changes the story, it could be a squirrel or an elephant or anything else that puts him to sleep and it would be just as weird and probably fit just as well too. I think the gnome was just chosen for the story to be a strong symbol for the mysterious aspects of nature. That it's something no one has ever seen before that he encounters in the wild is what injects mystery into the story. Another aspect discussed would be the environment that nature projects and in this story it appears to be a calming place or a whole other world all together. Rip Van Winkle goes into the woods with his dog and rifle to get away from society just to show that nature is a far different place that can change you from your stresses of modern society. So really instead of the story taking a stance on how nature should be preserved or used the story is more describing how much of a different place nature is and asking what nature is, kind of like the nature walk we did on Friday.
The Role Nature plays in the Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn
In The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn nature is never a very apparent theme in the story. Its a very subtle theme that I'm pretty sure won't ever be directly mentioned in the book. The raft that Huck and Jim travel on is technically their home in this book while the river that they travel on is their highway. But nature in the story is never really portrayed in a simplistic way as good or evil. It's normally portrayed as mysterious or unclear with it's motives. You could argue that in the story nature isn't just rocks and trees but it's the people they meet along the way. They meet plenty of different people along their journey and every one seemed kind of mysterious in one way or another. On the nature walk we took awhile ago we were talking about how nature was something that had an aspect of mystery to it and I think this fits perfectly with the people they meet along the way. Also Huck in the story seems to enjoy nature a lot, in fact in the beginning of the book when he's inside and living with the widow he hated and every time he's inside in some way he seems unhappy. So in this regard nature seems to be a a calming open world that is very inviting to Huck and he's glad to be in it. To go back to describing the Mississippi river, it's not just the highway but the deciding factor in how the journey of Huckleberry Finn and Jim will go. Some points in the story the river will seem to throw something their way to stop them from getting to where they want to go. The river in the story is very unpredictable this way and seems to be the biggest challenge the two must overcome.
Urban Wilderness
The Chicago Worlds Fair was such a massive jamming together of hundreds of different cultures and events that no one man could possibly ever see them all. It was so massive that it couldn't be built to last and was the result of the ecological disaster of the Chicago fire. It relates to nature in that everything has to at least have a bit of nature in it or it will collapse and fall to the ground. The natural world around us is something that is built to last unlike the World Fair. This Fair is certainly an example of urban wilderness because of the pure size and magnitude of the fair. It was a fair that was without law. Many of the areas of the chicago world fair had a lot of prostitution and drinking there also even some people were abducted and murder at this fair and these people couldn't have been caught at all because of the sheer enormity of the fair. Also some of the machines at the fair were very dangerous and would break down and hurt many people. So even with this magnificent assembly of culture and classiness can be put in this category of urban wilderness. It is still lawless and dangerous, but you wouldn't be able to tell this by appearance. In Maggie Girl of The streets the urban wilderness there is a lot less subtle because the city Maggie lives in is certainly dangerous and you can tell because of the poverty in the area. In the Chicago World Fair it looks classy and beautiful but its enormity cannot be controlled. The Chicago Fire for example was started because of malfunctioning machinery and human carelessness. So in conclusion even something with class and more civil ideology behind it can still be as dangerous as other urban areas and the Chicago World Fair can certainly fall under the Category of Urban Wilderness.
Maggie
Maggie Girl Of the streets is a more clear representation of what urban wilderness really is. Urban Wilderness is where appreciation for the importance of biodiversity meets the New Urbanism movement. In the story Maggie is a prostitute that is lost in Urban Wilderness in a city in New York. The city is poverty stricken and how destroyed it is in terms of nature. The city alone isn't what makes the story look so bleak as well though, the strength of the environment also comes from the Hardships that Maggie has to go through. These hardships make this city feel like a place that is truly wilderness to someone like this. Also in the same way animals must adapt to their habitat Maggie does the same by becoming a prostitute in order to survive. It makes modern day society seem to be more animalistic in a way because of how primitive and lawless the area they are in is. It also has this element of mystery to go along with it. Nature has always been talked about as mysterious because of lawless it is and how no one can truly maintain nature because of the sheer enormity of it. In the same way the city can't exactly be taken care of by the law and it creates this certain element of mystery or a feeling that almost anything could happen.
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby is very subtle in its ways of projecting themes of nature to its readers. These winks at nature are hidden within the books depictions of how society and social classes work. For example, a big theme of The Great Gatsby is "watching", the people that are watching in this book are basing whatever they see off of how it affects themselves, affects their desires, and also only see you for how much money you are worth. Their views would often be cloudy and incorrect because they aren't basing what they see off anything but themselves. This theme of watching can be related to how we treat natural resources today. When we see nature we don't exactly think about how much we need to take, we think about how much we want to take and how that will directly affect us. Social groups play a role in many other themes as well. For example, people are judged by how wealthy they are, not who they are naturally. Wealth controls everything it changes attitudes, feelings, and decisions that have to be made. This holds true to how nature is used, nature is used as a currency and really is the birthplace of money natural resources control how we live our lives completely.
Kyonascatzi?
To wrap it up we have Kyonascatzi a film that even without words it can say a lot about nature and reflect on the topics and themes that we discuss as a class. This film is a very solid representation of everything in this wikipage. It has religious undertones like Cotton Mather, it has opinions about how nature should be conserved, and even brings up aspects of urban wilderness and how even in human populated areas nature can exist. I think this film is a perfect embodiment of everything we have ever discussed as a class and it does this without saying a word. It's a film that starts out with an appreciative view towards nature but about thirty minutes into the film it flips around and shows humans destroying it. This reflects the theme of want vs. need when it comes to Earth's natural resources. The film seemed to have an emphasis on balance and imbalance as well. The imbalance comes from the human's way of treating natural resources in this cycle of destroy a lot then begin to manufacture a product only to have the product at some point be destroyed and then the cycle resets. This could show that as humans we take a lot more than we need in order to make things that we don't need like all of those hot dogs that were in the movie and things that will just end up destroyed much like the shuttle at the end of the film. The balance of the film comes in when you compare the beginning scenes of looking at nature to the occasional equally tranquil scenes when they look at the beauty and symmetry of the cities as well. This reflects of the theme/question that started the class year, what is nature? The view that Kyonascatzi takes is one that appreciates both the beautiful natural world and the manufactured and manipulated world that we have created. When the scenes of the city were sped up especially you could see that things were very organized among all of the chaos that happened on-screen people would just weave between each other and cars would pass and everything would function properly. I think this means that even though life is out of balance there is an order and beauty to the things that we as humans do.
this is just a quick video about man's influence to nature that I thought was pretty cool to watch. The TV is what represents us and what appears in the screen is our interpretation of nature.
Introduction
Nature plays a huge role in the lives of everyone in one way or another. In the interviews that I conducted everyone said that they like and appreciate nature, not a very big surprise. But their opinions of nature were still varied. Teenagers expressed the most diverse or varied answers when asked "Do you go out of your way to recycle?" some said that if recycling inconvenienced them in any way they would just throw their trash away or even on the ground for a very small portion of the interviews. But some said that they go out of their way to do whats best for the environment, the older people that I interviewed expressed care for their environment and seemed the most protective of their world. But throughout these interviews I realized that a lot of peoples opinions had resembled some people that are discussed in this wikispace. People that take religious views on nature, people that have a purely conservational opinion on nature, people that will bring up different types of nature like urban wilderness. The interviews challenged people to think about the topics brought up with questions like "What is nature?". And all of them had at least mentioned every single aspect brought up in this wikispace.
What does Nature mean to me?
Nature to me, is something that is very beautiful and feels like it has not been touched by man, even though all nature has been touched by man. To me central park is not nature at all because its been altered to ridiculous extremes. You don't have that same feeling when you step into central park as you do when you step into the tranquil and life-filled forests of New Hampshire. The reason for that is that you aren't supposed to know exactly what is in those forests. In nature there is always some element of mystery, this theme is reflected in any story you read that has themes of nature. I remember walking around the back woods of New Hampshire and simply seeing a porcupine. Porcupines around that area are a very uncommon thing to see and it's things like that that just make me feel like I'm in somewhere unfamiliar and familiar at the same time. I don't know why but actually getting up close and personal with nature is very fascinating and it's amazing what you can find just by walking around for a few minutes. I'm not very accustomed to living in these big cities which are manufactured by man. But, even though I live in a fairly natural area, going into the woods and seeing things from a different perspective will always be special. I know some people that say that not knowing what's in the woods scares them, but to me nature is a very welcoming and calming force that reflects at least some of its power where ever you go.
How is nature regarded in today's society?
Nature is something that should live in harmony with all existing life on our planet. But, in the eyes of our society nature is just land that hasn't been warped and twisted into our own image. Nature is completely separated from our society when it comes to more populated areas of the world like New York city or Philadelphia etc.
People think that nature is a very beautiful thing because of how fascinating it is to see something so rare and so comparable to our own society. In a way our own society is reflected in natural life, but the natural life is far more primitive than our high class society. A lot of people in the world today will say that nature is something we should just leave alone because of it's beauty and that nature is what makes us human. A long time ago when nature wasn't something that had been mapped out and completely "understood" nature was viewed very religiously which is something that we'll be getting into soon. Nature was a very powerful and moving force and the way people that want to preserve nature might have shaped their opinions from books like Genesis or other stories of the world's creation. Yet, nature is also seen by many as an area that the world can obtain natural resources from like wood, coal, petroleum, gold, copper, iron, even
some animal resources. So regardless of what nature means to others, people in charge will regard nature as something we get natural resources from.
Using the two initial texts, explain how our society views and should view/use/treat nature and wilderness. Citing examples from the two texts create a piece that states where we are today with our understanding of nature and it’s use and influence on our lives. Take from the many things we discussed to illuminate your point.
Society views our environment as an area with plenty of natural resources that will further benefit our society. The way our environment is treated is a more complex reality though, usually our environment is treated worse then how we actually look at it instead of just cutting down some trees and letting some grow or flourish we will sometimes completely disregard our views and do what seems to benefit our society more. But I still believe our society is a lot more like the author of the Idea Of A Garden in that, we view wilderness/nature as an important force in our lives and we respect but on the other hand we constantly destroy it so I guess we are more like a hybrid of how Brower looks at the environment and the author from the Idea Of A Garden.
From the three creation stories' point of view, what is the position of nature in our life?
The three creation stories of Genesis, Iroquois,
and Pima all have a unique way that they view life and nature.
The book of Genesis believes that god created the earth in seven days
and made man to try and live in harmony with that nature. Then man was tricked into eating the eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. This idea of man being told to live in harmony with nature and use it when you need too
then getting greedy and taking more then we needed defiantly pertains to our modern society. Our society does take a lot more than they save yet there is still wilderness in the world and we are using nature for us but also living in harmony with it as well. The creation story of Pima also has a view on nature
in that their god made lots of mistakes and destroyed and recreated the earth
several times because man and nature didn't combine very well because
of our own greed. But the story of Genesis is a lot more detailed in the way
humans and nature interact and its done in a way that's subtle but covers all the bases. According to Genesis our society will look at nature as one of the most beautiful things in the world but we won't treat it that way because we can't just have some of something because our greed won't allow us and we are not really worthy of the presence of nature and must be punished for doing
so.
Cotton Mather
Cotton Mather, one of the most celebrated of all of the New England Puritans in history, was born in February 12th 1663 at the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Cotton Mather also attended Harvard College when he was only twelve years old. His opinions on nature are derived from his religious beliefs. So because Cotton Mather is a Puritan he believes that nature is on this earth for man to utilize it exactly like views of Genesis. But his tone and point is a lot darker than Genesis and talks more about not knowing what is in the wilderness. At the top of his story "The Wonders Of The Invisible World" it says "A people of God in the Devil's Territories". This really speaks out to untamed wild America and he says that because of the mysterious aspect to this nature it is considered the land of the Devil. His stories don't necessarily say exactly why he thinks that the wilderness is the devil's territory but I believe that it is because of a story in the bible involving the Devil tempting baby Jesus with all of the land in the world and having him refuse it. He thinks that Puritans moving into the land of America and claiming that land in the name of god is making them receive punishment from the devil himself. So to sum it all up, Cotton Mather is a very educated man that uses his religion to explain nature or wilderness by saying that, God gave us nature and therefore we must all utilize it but still to be wary of the evil that lurks within the wild.
Emerson
Ralph Waldo Emerson is somebody that is great to really summarize all this wikipage has worked up to be. Emerson's opinion on nature is religious as well taking from Genesis and in a way believing the opposite of what Cotton Mather. His beliefs are also scientific as well as religious showing that this man has an open mind. He believes we should use nature for the benefit of society but not to the extent that the author of "The Idea of a Garden" thinks that we should use nature.
Unlike Cotton Mather who believes that wilderness is the devil's land and that controlled nature is the land of god, Emerson believes that nature was put here by god and we should definitely use it as a resource if it was given to us by god. He thinks we need to live in harmony with nature by using it for our own personal use. Though he does believe in god that doesn't mean he just accredits all nature to god, he believes that we must also study nature and takes a more scientific approach to viewing nature making Emerson very interesting in that matter. I think that Emerson is someone that has something that everyone could relate to in his opinions on nature, the main point being that we must enjoy nature and not cast it aside as something we rule over, but something that was put in our society that we must utilize and enjoy.
Jefferson's Notes On Virginia
I had read the Mountains passage and the rivers passage of Jefferson's Notes On Virginia. In the mountains passage Thomas Jefferson just seems to be very admirable of his landscape and how the mountains go along the sea coast for about 150 miles. Thomas Jefferson also seems to really res pect mountains or nature in general by saying the are "The spine of the country between the atlantic on one side, and The Mississippi and St. Lawrence on the other". This quote could take on a literal and metaphorical meaning saying that mountains our the bones of our country or parts of our country that must be respected or he could in the more literal sense just mean that the country is separated by mountains but I doubt that is the case.
In the passage "rivers" Thomas Jefferson all he does is just list every river that is in the state of virginia and where they lead and how deep they are. These notes on where things are probably started to get the attentions of people that are like Cotton Mather. The mapping of the unknown has probably made others aware of what's in nature. In this time of understanding nature, people started to go out and be inspired by these people.
Benjamin Franklin
Benjamin Franklin is an icon that everyone is familiar with in one way or another. I doubt that if you ask someone why Benjamin Franklin is famous they will say "Oh, I know him for his opinions of nature and Native American Culture". He was someone that wanted to see things for himself and this got him to go out into the wild and understand just like jefferson's notes on Virginia. Yet he is a man that looks past the title of "savage" on a Native American and just simply says they are a group of people that's ideology and ways of living are different then ours. He says that the Native Americans are much more able to work together in groups and kind of come together as a society much better then us. Why is that? I think he's saying that we can't live together as well as native americans can because of our very loose connection and understanding of our own environment. This goes with that idea on our nature walks that being in nature has a more calming air to it and you feel much more connected with the life around you. It's pretty difficult to appreciate nature inside of something like a brick building with plenty of modern technology inside. Benjamin Franklin's appreciation of the Native Americans doesn't just do what it says, it shows a difference between our two different lifestyles and analyzes why one works more in some ways and the other doesn't, and nature is a very big part of what works.
Crevecoeur: Letters From an American Farmer
Michel-Guillame-Jean de Crevecoeur was a frenchman that immigrated over from France into America to become a farmer. Crevecoeur believed that there was a powerful relationship between men (or white men) and nature. Crevecoeur had roamed America and it's wilderness's for almost 10 years even living with Indians because he saw nature as a frontier with no bounds to the exploration of our country. He characterized nature as "A howling wilderness, a savage and barbaric place with equal ease". But being a farmer his opinions on nature were more like a past version of the author of "The Idea of a Garden" in that he believed man needs nature to survive, but we must not completely destroy it and we have to keep it alive. He is very fascinated in how we go from a small colony on an unknown continent that we have never been too, to being a country that has discovered so much by utilizing nature or more specifically rivers, trees, animals and all sorts of other things to build our great nation of America.
Rip Van Winkle
The story of Rip Van Winkle doesn't have as much to do with taking a stance on nature as much as the other stories. Nature in the story of Rip Van Winkle is more symbolic to the very definition of nature or wilderness in that it's a very mysterious and untamed place that can change you. So this story brings in the mysterious aspect of wilderness that Cotton Mather discusses. A good representation of mystery in the story would be the gnome with his jug of booze that put him to sleep for twenty years. I don't think that the fact that it's a gnome that puts him to sleep for twenty years really changes the story, it could be a squirrel or an elephant or anything else that puts him to sleep and it would be just as weird and probably fit just as well too. I think the gnome was just chosen for the story to be a strong symbol for the mysterious aspects of nature. That it's something no one has ever seen before that he encounters in the wild is what injects mystery into the story. Another aspect discussed would be the environment that nature projects and in this story it appears to be a calming place or a whole other world all together. Rip Van Winkle goes into the woods with his dog and rifle to get away from society just to show that nature is a far different place that can change you from your stresses of modern society. So really instead of the story taking a stance on how nature should be preserved or used the story is more describing how much of a different place nature is and asking what nature is, kind of like the nature walk we did on Friday.
The Role Nature plays in the Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn
In The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn nature is never a very apparent theme in the story. Its a very subtle theme that I'm pretty sure won't ever be directly mentioned in the book. The raft that Huck and Jim travel on is technically their home in this book while the river that they travel on is their highway. But nature in the story is never really portrayed in a simplistic way as good or evil. It's normally portrayed as mysterious or unclear with it's motives. You could argue that in the story nature isn't just rocks and trees but it's the people they meet along the way. They meet plenty of different people along their journey and every one seemed kind of mysterious in one way or another. On the nature walk we took awhile ago we were talking about how nature was something that had an aspect of mystery to it and I think this fits perfectly with the people they meet along the way. Also Huck in the story seems to enjoy nature a lot, in fact in the beginning of the book when he's inside and living with the widow he hated and every time he's inside in some way he seems unhappy. So in this regard nature seems to be a a calming open world that is very inviting to Huck and he's glad to be in it. To go back to describing the Mississippi river, it's not just the highway but the deciding factor in how the journey of Huckleberry Finn and Jim will go. Some points in the story the river will seem to throw something their way to stop them from getting to where they want to go. The river in the story is very unpredictable this way and seems to be the biggest challenge the two must overcome.
Urban Wilderness
The Chicago Worlds Fair was such a massive jamming together of hundreds of different cultures and events that no one man could possibly ever see them all. It was so massive that it couldn't be built to last and was the result of the ecological disaster of the Chicago fire. It relates to nature in that everything has to at least have a bit of nature in it or it will collapse and fall to the ground. The natural world around us is something that is built to last unlike the World Fair. This Fair is certainly an example of urban wilderness because of the pure size and magnitude of the fair. It was a fair that was without law. Many of the areas of the chicago world fair had a lot of prostitution and drinking there also even some people were abducted and murder at this fair and these people couldn't have been caught at all because of the sheer enormity of the fair. Also some of the machines at the fair were very dangerous and would break down and hurt many people. So even with this magnificent assembly of culture and classiness can be put in this category of urban wilderness. It is still lawless and dangerous, but you wouldn't be able to tell this by appearance. In Maggie Girl of The streets the urban wilderness there is a lot less subtle because the city Maggie lives in is certainly dangerous and you can tell because of the poverty in the area. In the Chicago World Fair it looks classy and beautiful but its enormity cannot be controlled. The Chicago Fire for example was started because of malfunctioning machinery and human carelessness. So in conclusion even something with class and more civil ideology behind it can still be as dangerous as other urban areas and the Chicago World Fair can certainly fall under the Category of Urban Wilderness.
Maggie
Maggie Girl Of the streets is a more clear representation of what urban wilderness really is. Urban Wilderness is where appreciation for the importance of biodiversity meets the New Urbanism movement. In the story Maggie is a prostitute that is lost in Urban Wilderness in a city in New York. The city is poverty stricken and how destroyed it is in terms of nature. The city alone isn't what makes the story look so bleak as well though, the strength of the environment also comes from the Hardships that Maggie has to go through. These hardships make this city feel like a place that is truly wilderness to someone like this. Also in the same way animals must adapt to their habitat Maggie does the same by becoming a prostitute in order to survive. It makes modern day society seem to be more animalistic in a way because of how primitive and lawless the area they are in is. It also has this element of mystery to go along with it. Nature has always been talked about as mysterious because of lawless it is and how no one can truly maintain nature because of the sheer enormity of it. In the same way the city can't exactly be taken care of by the law and it creates this certain element of mystery or a feeling that almost anything could happen.
The Great Gatsby
The Great Gatsby is very subtle in its ways of projecting themes of nature to its readers. These winks at nature are hidden within the books depictions of how society and social classes work. For example, a big theme of The Great Gatsby is "watching", the people that are watching in this book are basing whatever they see off of how it affects themselves, affects their desires, and also only see you for how much money you are worth. Their views would often be cloudy and incorrect because they aren't basing what they see off anything but themselves. This theme of watching can be related to how we treat natural resources today. When we see nature we don't exactly think about how much we need to take, we think about how much we want to take and how that will directly affect us. Social groups play a role in many other themes as well. For example, people are judged by how wealthy they are, not who they are naturally. Wealth controls everything it changes attitudes, feelings, and decisions that have to be made. This holds true to how nature is used, nature is used as a currency and really is the birthplace of money natural resources control how we live our lives completely.
Kyonascatzi?
To wrap it up we have Kyonascatzi a film that even without words it can say a lot about nature and reflect on the topics and themes that we discuss as a class. This film is a very solid representation of everything in this wikipage. It has religious undertones like Cotton Mather, it has opinions about how nature should be conserved, and even brings up aspects of urban wilderness and how even in human populated areas nature can exist. I think this film is a perfect embodiment of everything we have ever discussed as a class and it does this without saying a word. It's a film that starts out with an appreciative view towards nature but about thirty minutes into the film it flips around and shows humans destroying it. This reflects the theme of want vs. need when it comes to Earth's natural resources. The film seemed to have an emphasis on balance and imbalance as well. The imbalance comes from the human's way of treating natural resources in this cycle of destroy a lot then begin to manufacture a product only to have the product at some point be destroyed and then the cycle resets. This could show that as humans we take a lot more than we need in order to make things that we don't need like all of those hot dogs that were in the movie and things that will just end up destroyed much like the shuttle at the end of the film. The balance of the film comes in when you compare the beginning scenes of looking at nature to the occasional equally tranquil scenes when they look at the beauty and symmetry of the cities as well. This reflects of the theme/question that started the class year, what is nature? The view that Kyonascatzi takes is one that appreciates both the beautiful natural world and the manufactured and manipulated world that we have created. When the scenes of the city were sped up especially you could see that things were very organized among all of the chaos that happened on-screen people would just weave between each other and cars would pass and everything would function properly. I think this means that even though life is out of balance there is an order and beauty to the things that we as humans do.
this is just a quick video about man's influence to nature that I thought was pretty cool to watch. The TV is what represents us and what appears in the screen is our interpretation of nature.